move or not?
Aug 10th, 2006 | 10:44 AM
#105
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
Likes: 0
butter294, this was in physical copy, no links, in our Gov.Docs * (Library) as a state ranking for new business and new home ownership (family)for incoming populations.
When searching for it online for you I come up against all kinds of on-going process in the other Washington (D.C.) to invalidate this type of Washington State taxation structure. There is a bill undergoing at the federal level to make this kind of tax law, and especially added tax to services and ownership sales and also internet goods and services not entirely contained within the state of Washington. At the present time they all have (looks like hundreds to me on fruit, meat etc.) specific exemptions or they are taxed.
http://dor.wa.gov
This explains some of it, but the 1.78% or 2% sales tax or other additions paid for by the seller on the sales price of the home are also not the only taxes due at closing and vary greatly. Local counties and districts below that level have added tax. And the property tax levels themselves can be assessed upwards of 100% every 4 years in some counties on present evaluation. So if your house assessment value increases it is MUCH more of a percentage of the original home cost percentage cost, and that is what was figured for this ranking. Some counties get assessed every year at 25% increases possible at most, some only 4 years at a top level allowed of 100% increases. It's real dire for retirees' planning on coming into Washington because they do not know what levels of appreciation will do to their property taxes.
That is what is happening in IL without the sales tax. And it will drive me out soon.
I came across a huge article and Bill Exemption made recently to protect Military Air Forces USA who are gouged upon leaving Washington State. They seemed to have won exemptions in some cases. There is great disparity on local additions to tax on property as well. These military petitioners were being taxed at the higher 5 to 6% levels plus 6% of house sale value for real estate fees when they were leaving Washington State (were reassigned) under the 2 year period.
Washington State is highly taxed, and that there is no State Income Tax as such, is very misleading to those coming in and comparing it state to state with others that have the more common USA type tax structures. Their tax law is actually being highly contested by Federal bill and Internet Sales lobbies, because they tax on items sold regardless if there's any physical placement or seat in Washington State itself.
When searching for it online for you I come up against all kinds of on-going process in the other Washington (D.C.) to invalidate this type of Washington State taxation structure. There is a bill undergoing at the federal level to make this kind of tax law, and especially added tax to services and ownership sales and also internet goods and services not entirely contained within the state of Washington. At the present time they all have (looks like hundreds to me on fruit, meat etc.) specific exemptions or they are taxed.
http://dor.wa.gov
This explains some of it, but the 1.78% or 2% sales tax or other additions paid for by the seller on the sales price of the home are also not the only taxes due at closing and vary greatly. Local counties and districts below that level have added tax. And the property tax levels themselves can be assessed upwards of 100% every 4 years in some counties on present evaluation. So if your house assessment value increases it is MUCH more of a percentage of the original home cost percentage cost, and that is what was figured for this ranking. Some counties get assessed every year at 25% increases possible at most, some only 4 years at a top level allowed of 100% increases. It's real dire for retirees' planning on coming into Washington because they do not know what levels of appreciation will do to their property taxes.
That is what is happening in IL without the sales tax. And it will drive me out soon.
I came across a huge article and Bill Exemption made recently to protect Military Air Forces USA who are gouged upon leaving Washington State. They seemed to have won exemptions in some cases. There is great disparity on local additions to tax on property as well. These military petitioners were being taxed at the higher 5 to 6% levels plus 6% of house sale value for real estate fees when they were leaving Washington State (were reassigned) under the 2 year period.
Washington State is highly taxed, and that there is no State Income Tax as such, is very misleading to those coming in and comparing it state to state with others that have the more common USA type tax structures. Their tax law is actually being highly contested by Federal bill and Internet Sales lobbies, because they tax on items sold regardless if there's any physical placement or seat in Washington State itself.
Aug 10th, 2006 | 11:19 AM
#106
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 98,197
Likes: 12
mleg- as Orcas suggests start another thread to let us Seattle folks help you with the specifics.
(maybe skip telling your personal situation so everyone doesn't feel free to pile on with their opinions about your decisions, which are none of their business imo)
kindly, Suze in Seattle
(maybe skip telling your personal situation so everyone doesn't feel free to pile on with their opinions about your decisions, which are none of their business imo)
kindly, Suze in Seattle
Aug 10th, 2006 | 12:00 PM
#107
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 0
JJ5, I am confused by what you have written. I went back and did another internet seach and think you are talking about the real estate excise tax. The State's tax is 1.28%. Jurisdictions can tack on additional taxes for various purposes and on average, the tax on a transaction is 1.78% total. Apparently, more can be added, up to 2.5%, so the total could go as high as 3.78% (at least according to a website from 2005). But I think a tax rate that high on a sale would be rare.
It is never a good idea to plan on buying a house anywhere and turn around and sell it in a short time, as real estate fees are around 5 to 6% everywhere; mortgages are expensive to purchase; moving is expensive and emotionally draining; and, as you point out, there are excise taxes. Washington may lean more on this type of tax than others, since it has no income tax, but I am curious where you are getting figures like 5 or 6%.
I don't think people are not moving here because of this particular tax situation. If people don't come here, it is because housing costs are running amok. In fact, we are hearing about people turning down good job opportunities in this area for that reason.
It is never a good idea to plan on buying a house anywhere and turn around and sell it in a short time, as real estate fees are around 5 to 6% everywhere; mortgages are expensive to purchase; moving is expensive and emotionally draining; and, as you point out, there are excise taxes. Washington may lean more on this type of tax than others, since it has no income tax, but I am curious where you are getting figures like 5 or 6%.
I don't think people are not moving here because of this particular tax situation. If people don't come here, it is because housing costs are running amok. In fact, we are hearing about people turning down good job opportunities in this area for that reason.
Aug 10th, 2006 | 12:15 PM
#108
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
Likes: 0
You aren't the only one confused and people who have had to shell out increasing amounts of money in tax upon selling or changing homes within the state itself are petitioning like crazy.
If you read all of the tax links at the gov site, you will see that their answer is to take out "reverse equity" loans for seniors on the newer home or even the same home that has had sky-rocketing property assessment etc.
Nice of them, is my take on all of that!
She sounds like a mover, and that sounds like a policy that is not good for movers quick term. Or for much "moving" at all, IMHO.
If you read all of the tax links at the gov site, you will see that their answer is to take out "reverse equity" loans for seniors on the newer home or even the same home that has had sky-rocketing property assessment etc.
Nice of them, is my take on all of that!
She sounds like a mover, and that sounds like a policy that is not good for movers quick term. Or for much "moving" at all, IMHO.
Aug 12th, 2006 | 05:19 AM
#111
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 17,226
Likes: 0
Maybe just personality or personal preference?
There was a very interesting article in USAToday this week about homeowners selling their properties and renting instead. Here's a link to the article online.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...-1a-usat_x.htm
The online article doesn't have the graphic that showed the gaps between monthly mortgage rates and rental rates in high cost markets.
A couple of interesting quotes from the article -
A homeowner in Orange County, Calif., for example, would have to stay in his or her home for a decade before breaking even on out-of-pocket costs compared with renting, according to Marcus & Millichap.
That's still not enough to persuade Seibel and Leger to keep their home there. "We've been watching the rents," Seibel says. "But for what we're paying for our mortgage and property taxes, we could be renting a mansion in Pacific Heights."
If cost is the major concern, then perhaps sell and rent until the teenage girls finish school. With concern that the real estate bubble is about to burst, people who have not considered renting evidently are doing so.
A completely different option might be to stay and rent, and put the savings toward something in a vacation or retirement area for you. The entire family could enjoy the "getaway" location now, you are taking care of your future and you stay in the real estate market at a lower cost.
There was a very interesting article in USAToday this week about homeowners selling their properties and renting instead. Here's a link to the article online.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...-1a-usat_x.htm
The online article doesn't have the graphic that showed the gaps between monthly mortgage rates and rental rates in high cost markets.
A couple of interesting quotes from the article -
A homeowner in Orange County, Calif., for example, would have to stay in his or her home for a decade before breaking even on out-of-pocket costs compared with renting, according to Marcus & Millichap.
That's still not enough to persuade Seibel and Leger to keep their home there. "We've been watching the rents," Seibel says. "But for what we're paying for our mortgage and property taxes, we could be renting a mansion in Pacific Heights."
If cost is the major concern, then perhaps sell and rent until the teenage girls finish school. With concern that the real estate bubble is about to burst, people who have not considered renting evidently are doing so.
A completely different option might be to stay and rent, and put the savings toward something in a vacation or retirement area for you. The entire family could enjoy the "getaway" location now, you are taking care of your future and you stay in the real estate market at a lower cost.
Aug 12th, 2006 | 07:24 AM
#113
Guest
Posts: n/a
Lots of overcast days, drizzle in the winter;getting crowded here too, freeways are antiquated, home prices going up here too, school quality differ, mixed races (many Asian immigrants), etc., etc., and still, I would not live permanently anywhere else (and I have lived all over the world). As Abe Lincoln said "I reckon folks are just about as happy as they make up their minds to be."
Aug 12th, 2006 | 11:12 AM
#114
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
Likes: 0
And Abe Lincoln was also pretty smart on moving to places that made the welcome in AND the possible departure out upwardly mobile for the moving adventurer. He was forever moving in his life for financial advancement- an ironic quote here in this context.
Aug 12th, 2006 | 11:17 PM
#116
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
If you want to move to the Puget Sound area and want more "bang for your buck" consider Tacoma. Until recently (last 10 years or so) people would laugh if they heard that but it's exciting to be a part of the growth happening here. For what you would pay for a home in Bellevue you could buy a magnificent home with a view of Puget Sound in Tacoma, perhaps in University Place -- they have a great school system. Plus, you would be living in a more relaxed place and could drive to Seattle for special events (just don't plan on commuting).
